You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Infection and exposure to vector-borne pathogens in rural dogs and their ticks, Uganda
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Parasites & Vectors, June 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13071-015-0919-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tatiana Proboste, Gladys Kalema-Zikusoka, Laura Altet, Laia Solano-Gallego, Isabel G. Fernández de Mera, Andrea D. Chirife, Jesús Muro, Ester Bach, Antonio Piazza, Aitor Cevidanes, Valeria Blanda, Lawrence Mugisha, José de la Fuente, Santo Caracappa, Javier Millán |
| Abstract |
In rural parts of Africa, dogs live in close association with humans and livestock, roam freely, and usually do not receive prophylactic measures. Thus, they are a source of infectious disease for humans and for wildlife such as protected carnivores. In 2011, an epidemiological study was carried out around three conservation areas in Uganda to detect the presence and determine the prevalence of vector-borne pathogens in rural dogs and associated ticks to evaluate the risk that these pathogens pose to humans and wildlife. Serum samples (n = 105), blood smears (n = 43) and blood preserved on FTA cards (n = 38) and ticks (58 monospecific pools of Haemaphysalis leachi and Rhipicephalus praetextatus including 312 ticks from 52 dogs) were collected from dogs. Dog sera were tested by indirect immunofluorescence to detect the presence of antibodies against Rickettsia conorii and Ehrlichia canis. Antibodies against R. conorii were also examined by indirect enzyme immunoassay. Real time PCR for the detection of Rickettsia spp., Anaplasmataceae, Bartonella spp. and Babesia spp. was performed in DNA extracted from FTA cards and ticks. 99 % of the dogs were seropositive to Rickettsia spp. and 29.5 % to Ehrlichia spp. Molecular analyses revealed that 7.8 % of the blood samples were infected with Babesia rossi, and all were negative for Rickettsia spp. and Ehrlichia spp. Ticks were infected with Rickettsia sp. (18.9 %), including R. conorii and R. massiliae; Ehrlichia sp. (18.9 %), including E. chaffeensis and Anaplasma platys; and B. rossi (1.7 %). Bartonella spp. was not detected in any of the blood or tick samples. This study confirms the presence of previously undetected vector-borne pathogens of humans and animals in East Africa. We recommend that dog owners in rural Uganda be advised to protect their animals against ectoparasites to prevent the transmission of pathogens to humans and wildlife. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 10% |
| Spain | 1 | 10% |
| Chile | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 7 | 70% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 70% |
| Scientists | 2 | 20% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 10% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 121 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 2 | 2% |
| Unknown | 119 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 21 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 20 | 17% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 13 | 11% |
| Researcher | 12 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 8% |
| Other | 23 | 19% |
| Unknown | 22 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 37 | 31% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 33 | 27% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 7% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 5 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 11 | 9% |
| Unknown | 23 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 May 2017.
All research outputs
#6,304,231
of 25,591,967 outputs
Outputs from Parasites & Vectors
#1,255
of 6,048 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,908
of 281,204 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Parasites & Vectors
#20
of 118 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,591,967 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,048 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 281,204 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 118 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.